Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

RESERVED ON : 15-09-2026

DELIVERED ON : 12-10-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.KARTHIKEYAN

CRL A(MD) No.124 of 2019

1.Pandidurai

2.Ramachandran

3.Soundarapandi

4.Jeyaraj

5.Suresh

6.Karthickraja

..Appellants/Accused

Nos.1 to 6

Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu

Rep. by the Inspector of Police

Palanichettypatti Police Station,

Theni District

(In Crime No.515 of 2016) ..Respondent/Complainant

Prayer: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C, to call for the

records pertaining to the conviction and sentence passed in Spl.S.C.No.8 of

2017 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Theni

dated 12.03.2019 and set aside the same as illegal and acquit the appellants.

For Appellants :Mr.K.Sivabalan

For Respondent :Mr.A.Robinson

Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

__________

Page1 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and

sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Theni

in Spl.S.C.No.8 of 2017, dated 12.03.2019.

2. On careful perusal of records, it is found that PW9 Mr.Murugesan, the

then Sub-Inspector of Police, Palanichettipatti, received Ex.P1 complaint from

PW1 on 20.09.2016 at around 14.00 hours and registered Ex.P4 First

Information Report in Crime No.515 of 2016 for the offences punishable under

Sections 147, 294(b), 506(i) of IPC and Section 12 of POCSO Act, 2012. He

placed the said First Information Report for the investigation of Inspector of

Police. PW10 Mr.A.Manimaran, the then Inspector of Police, Palanichettipatti

Police Station, took up investigation of the said case on 20.09.2016; on the

same day, he visited the place of occurrence and prepared Ex.P2 Observation

Mahazar and Ex.P5 Rough Sketch in the presence of witnesses Murugan and

PW5 Amritharaj. Thereafter, he examined the defacto complainant and other

witnesses and recorded their statements. Woman Sub-Inspector of Police,

Tmt.Dhanalakshmi, had recorded the statement of the victim. On the same day,

at around 17.30 hours, he arrested the Accused and caused them to be

remanded in judicial custody. He examined the witnesses Rajesh,

Satheeskumar, Selvaraj, Suruli Lingasamy, Sub-Inspector Murugesan, Woman

__________

Page2 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

Sub-Inspector of Police Tmt.Dhanalakshmi and recorded their statements. He

produced the victim before the learned Judicial Magistrate for recording her

statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, he handed over the case

diary to his successor. PW11 Tmt.Ramalakshmi, received the case diary and

took up investigation of the said case on 27.11.2016; she visited the place of

occurrence and examined the witnesses and since they repeated their statements

before her predecessor, she did not record any further statement; on the same

day she laid final report before the Court.

3. The Fast Track Mahila Court has taken cognizance of the final report

in Spl.S.C.No.8 of 2017 and issued summons to the Accused. On their

appearance, after hearing both sides, the Trial Court has framed charges against

the first Accused for the offences punishable under Section 147, 294(b), 506(i)

and Section 12 of POCSO Act, 2012 and as against the Accused Nos. 2 to 6 for

the offences punishable under Sections 147, 294(b), 506(i) and Section 12 read

with Section 17 of POCSO Act, 2012. The charges were explained to the

Accused and they denied the said charges. Therefore, they were tried by the

Trial Court.

4. On side of the prosecution, PW1 to PW12 were examined and exhibits

P1 to P7 were marked. Upon closure of the evidence of the prosecution

__________

Page3 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

witnesses, the incriminating materials appearing in the evidence were put to the

Accused under Section 313(1)(b) of Cr.P.C., the Accused denied them as false

and reported that they have witnesses on their side. However, no witness was

examined on their side, but Ex.D1 was marked.

5. After hearing both sides, the Trial Court found the 1

st

appellant guilty

of the offences punishable under Section 147, 294(b), 506(i) of IPC and Section

12 of POCSO Act. Further, the Trial Court has found the appellants 2 to 6

guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 147, 294(b), 506(i) and

Section 12 read with Section 17 of POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced as below:

Rank of the

Appellant

Section of Law

Sentence of

imprisonment

Fine amount

Appellants 1 to

6

147 of IPC

Two years

Simple

Imprisonment

Rs.500/- each i/d to

undergo six months

Simple

Imprisonment

Appellants 1 to

6

294(b) of IPC

Three months

Simple

Imprisonment

Rs.500/- each i/d to

undergo three

weeks Simple

Imprisonment

Appellants 1 to

6

506(i) of IPC

Two years

Simple

Imprisonment

Rs.1000/- each i/d

to undergo six

months Simple

Imprisonment

1

st

appellant

Section 12 of

the POCSO Act

Three years

Simple

Imprisonment

Rs.2000/- each i/d

to undergo six

months Simple

Imprisonment

__________

Page4 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

Appellants 2 to

6

Section 12 r/w.

Section 17 of

the POCSO Act

Three years

Simple

Imprisonment

Rs.2000/- each i/d

to undergo six

months Simple

Imprisonment

Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the Accused had presented the

present appeal before this Court.

6. Point for determination:

Whether the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial

Court is sustainable?

Answer:

7. On careful perusal of records, it is found that it is the case of the

prosecution that on 17.09.2016 at around 5.00 p.m., when the victim was

returning from the school to her house by walk, near Sivalinganayakkanpatti

bus stop, the first appellant herein compelled her to love him and marry him.

She did not reply to the same. Therefore, all the Accused asked her to reply and

threatened her that if she did not reply, they would kidnap her. On hearing that,

the defacto complainant reprimanded the first appellant. Due to this motive, on

18.09.2016 at around 17.00 hours, the appellants 1 to 6 have gone to the house

of the defacto complainant, abused him in filthy language and threatened him

by saying VNy Njtbah kfNd vq;flh cd; kfs; mtis

__________

Page5 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

Jhf;FNthk; ,y;yhtpl;lhy; cd;id nfhy;Nthk;. Therefore, according to the

prosecution, the appellants are liable to be punished under Sections 147,

294(b), 506(i) of IPC and Section 12 r/w.17 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

8. On careful perusal of record, it is found that the father of the

victimwas examined as PW1. PW1 is the one who set the criminal law in

motion. He, in his evidence, deposed that his wife died three years back. He is

the one who has given studies to his children. When the victim had gone in the

bus for school, the first appellant threatened her to love him and marry him.

The other Accused/appellants, had gone in aid of him and threatened her by

saying that she should marry only A1, otherwise they would kidnap her. On

17-9-2016, the said incident was happened and on the same day evening, the

victim had informed the same to PW1. PW1 informed the parents of the first

appellant and asked them to reprimand him.

9. PW1 further deposed that on the next day, on 18-9-2016, the

appellants herein came in front of the defacto complainant's house, abused him

in filthy language and threatened him by saying V Njtbah kfNd vq;flh

cd; nghz;Z> vd;iwf;fhtJ cd; nghz;iz

Jhf;fptpLNthk; ,y;yhtpl;lhy; cd;id nfhd;W tpLNthk;. The witnesses

Rajesh, Satheesh and Selvaraj intervened and saved them off. He has informed

__________

Page6 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

the elders, however, no steps were taken. Therefore, on 20-9-2016, he lodged

an Ex.P1 complaint with Palanichettipatti Police Station. PW2 Rajesh and PW3

Satheesh Kumar are deposed in line with PW1.

10. The victim was examined as PW4. She, in her evidence, deposed that

she was studying 10

th

standard at the time of occurrence. She used to go to

school by government bus. She used to go to school by getting down at

Banglamedu bus stop and used to walk. Again after the school, she will come

by auto up to Sivalinganayakkanpatti Vilakku and thereafter, used to go to her

house by walk. When she boarded the government bus for attending the school,

the first appellant stood near her seat and threatened her to love him. Daily he

has done that. She has not reported the same to her father.

11. PW4 further deposed that on 17-09-2016, she boarded the same bus

and got down at the Banglamedu bus stop and when she was proceeding

towards the school, he followed her and threatened her to love him and marry

him, failing which he would kidnap her. Thereafter, at around 5.00 p.m., she

has gone in an auto and thereafter, proceeding towards her house by walk. At

the time, the first appellant herein followed her. The first appellant asked her as

to why there is no reply for his question and then he threatened her by saying if

she does not give a favourable reply, he would kidnap her. The other appellants

__________

Page7 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

were also threatened her by saying if she has not given favourable answer to

A1, they would kidnap her and marry her with A1. Therefore, she had walked

fast. Further, they threatened her by saying today she has escaped and one day

she would be caught by them.

12. PW4 further deposed that she reported the same to her father. Her

father informed the father of A1 and asked him to reprimand him. On

18-9-2016, the victim and her father were in the house, at that time, the

appellants came there and abused them in filthy language by saying vq;flh

cd; nghz;Z mtis vd;iwf;FdhSk; ehq;fs; Jhf;fpg;Ngha;tpLNthk;

vd;id eP fz;bj;jhy; cd;idAk; cd; FLk;gj;ijAk; ntl;btpLNthk;.

The neighbours Rajesh and others came and intervened. Therefore, they have

gone away. PW1 has given complaint to Palanichettipatti Police Station. The

victim/PW4 has given statement before the learned Judicial Magistrate. She

was examined by the Women Constable.

13. Witnesses to the mahazar/Ex.P2. Amirtharaj was examined as PW5

and he has spoken about the preparation of observation Mahazar by the

Investigation Officer. PW6, the learned Judicial Magistrate, has spoken about

the recording of Ex.P3 164 statement of the victim. PW7 Selvaraj has also

deposed in line with PW1. PW8 Tmt.Dhanalakshmi, is the one who recorded

__________

Page8 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

the statement of the victim. PW9 is the one who registered the first information

report. PW10 and 11 are the Investigation Officers and they have deposed

about the investigation done by them.

14. On careful reading of evidence projected on the side of the

prosecution, it is found that, as per the case of the prosecution, the occurrence

was happened on 17.9.2016 and 18.9.2016. In so far as the occurrence said to

have happened on 17.9.2016, there is no other witnesses except the victim. In

so far as the occurrence said to have happened on 18.9.2016, the occurrence is

said to have happened in front of the house of PW1, which was witnessed by

PW2, PW3, PW7.

15. On careful reading of the evidence of victim, it is found that the

appellant herein followed her and compelled her to love and marry him. When

it was reported to PW1, he has informed the parents of the first appellant to

reprimand him. Due to which, all the appellants assembled unlawfully, abused

PW1 in filthy language and threatened him. However, on careful perusal of

records, it is found that PW1, in his evidence, deposed that on 18.9.2016, all the

Accused assembled unlawfully in front of his house, abused him by saying that

V Njtbah kfNd vq;flh cd; nghz;Z cd; nghz;iz

Jhf;fptpLNthk; ,y;yhtpl;lhy; cd;id nfhd;W tpLNthk;. No doubt, the

__________

Page9 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

said word is a vulgar word. PW2 did not say that the appellants herein had

abused PW1 by saying the said word. PW3, though deposed that the appellants

had abused PW1 in filthy language, he has not stated the exact word said to

have used by the appellants herein. PW7 has not spoken that the appellants

herein had abused PW1 by filthy language. Further, the case of the prosecution

that all the six Accused assembled in front of the house of PW1 and abused him

by saying V Njtbah kfNd vq;flh cd; nghz;Z cd; nghz;iz

Jhf;fptpLNthk; ,y;yhtpl;lhy; cd;id nfhd;W tpLNthk; is hard to

believe. No two persons, unless there is a prior meeting of mind prior to the

occurrence that they have to use a particular word to abuse the victim, could

utter exactly the same words at the same time. Absolutely, no materials are

produced before the Trial Court to show that the Appellants have met early and

decided to speak the same words as against PW1.

16. Further, this Court in Savarimuthu Nadar & Others Versus State

represented by Sub Inspector of Police, Ambasamudram & Another reported

in 1994 (1) MLJ (Crl) 154 held as follows.:-

4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the rival

counsels. I shall first take up the submissions regarding offence

under Sec.294(b), I.P.C. Sec.294(b), I.P.C. reads as follows:

"294. Obscene acts and songs: whoever, to the annoyance of

others.

__________

Page10 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

(a).......

(b) Sings, recites or utters any obscene songs, ballad or words, in

or near any public place, shall be punished with imprisonment of

either description for a term which may extend to three months, or

with fine, or with both".

The word "obscene" is not defined in Indian Penal Code. But there

is reference to the word "obscene" in Sec.292, I.P.C. Sec. 292(1)

reads as follows:

"292. Sale etc., of obscene books etc.: (1) For the purposes of sub-

sec. (2), a book, pamphlet, paper, writing, drawing, painting,

representation, figure or any other object, shall be deemed to be

obscene if it is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its

effect, or (where it comprises of two or more distinct items) the

effect of any one of its items, is, if taken as a whole, such as to tend

to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all

relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained

or embodied in it“. The very reading of the section would show that

only for the purpose of sub-sec. (2) the word “obscene” is defined

in the manner specified therein. But yet it is indicative of the

meaning of the word” “obscene”.

5. In Jafar Ahmad Khan v. State, A.I.R. 1963 All. 105, a single

Judge of the Allahabad High Court had pointed out that no precise

or arithmetical definition of the word “obscene” which would

cover all possible cases can be given. It will have to be judged on

the facts of each case whether in the context of its surroundings the

questioned act is obscene or not. In the Lexicon Webster

Dictionary, meaning of “obscene” is given as “objectionable or

repugnant to acceptable standards of decency of morality; indecent

__________

Page11 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

pornographic; offensive in language or action: tending to incite

lust or depravity”.

6. In P.T.Chacko v. Nainan Chacko 1967 M.L.J. (Crl.) 815, the

Kerala High Court had occasion to consider “obscenity” with

reference to Sec.294 (b) I.P.C. The learned Single Judge had

observed as follows:

“The only point argued was that the 1

st

Accused had not committed

an offence punishable under Sec.294 (b) Indian Penal Code by

uttering the words above mentioned. The Courts below have held

that the words uttered were obscene and the utterance caused

annoyance to the Public. I am not inclined to take this view. In The

Queen v. Hicklin, Cockbura, C.J. laid down the test of ‘obscenity’

in these words: “.....the test of obscenity in this, whether the

tendency of the matter charged as obscenity is to deprave and

corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences.”

This test has been uniformly followed in India. The Supreme Court

has accepted the correctness of the test in Ranji D. Udeshi v. State

of Maharashtra. In Samuel Roth v. U.S.A., Chief Justice Warren

said that the test of ‘obscenity’ is the “Substantial tendency to

corrupt by arousing lustful desires.” Mr.Justice Harlan observed

that in order to be ‘obscene’ the matter must tend to sexually

impure thoughts“. I do not think that the words uttered in this case

have such a tendency”.

With respect, I agree with the view expressed by the Kerala High

Court, I am fortified in expressing such a view by the indication

given in Sec.292, I.P.C. with regard to the obscene books.

7. If the words uttered in this case are examined, in the light of the

__________

Page12 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

test, with which I have agreed, evidently it would not satisfy the

test. The words used might have no doubt annoyed the person

towards whom those words were used. It may be vulgar words. But

they cannot be equated to “obscene” words. So I accept the first

submission made by Miss.Shymala that the allegations would not

make out the offence under Sec.294(b) I.P.C.

From the above decision, it is clear that the word 'obscene' should satisfy that it

should be in the nature to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to

such immoral influences. No doubt, the word is a vulgar word and it cannot be

said to be an obscene word. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that

the prosecution has failed to prove the offence under Section 294(b) of IPC

beyond all reasonable doubts.

17. It is the further case of the prosecution that all the Accused assembled

and threatened the father of the victim, PW1 that they would kidnap his

daughter, or else they would murder him. However, though the occurrence was

said to have happened on 18.09.2016, the complaint was lodged only on

20.09.2016 at around 14.00 hours, with a delay of 2 days. According to PW1,

the complaint is typed one and further, he has to look for his livelihood and

therefore, he has given complaint with a delay of one day. On careful perusal of

Ex.P1 complaint, it is found that he has not given any such reason. The

__________

Page13 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

complaint is typed one and the complaint is dated 19-09-2016. PW1 in his

cross-examination has admitted that he does not remember in which computer

centre the complaint was typed. Further, he admitted that the complaint was

typed and brought from Theni and he signed. Further, he answered that he does

not know who has typed and brought the complaint. Therefore, it is clear that

PW1 has disowned his complaint. It is not typed to his dictation but typed by

somebody and he has only signed in the said complaint. In the said

circumstances, there is a serious doubts in the genesis of Ex.P1 complaint.

18. Further, on careful perusal of Ex.P1 complaint, it is found that though

the said complaint was said to have given at 14.00 hours on 20.09.2016, it

reached the Court only at 9.20 p.m. on 20.09.2016. There is a delay of 7.20

hours. There is no explanation for the delayed dispatch to the Court. Further,

the conduct of PW1 in looking after his livelihood and signing the complaint

brought by someone makes it clear that he is casual and was not intimidated by

the words spoken by the appellants. It is useful to refer to the judgment of this

Court reported in (1988) L.W.(Crl.)178 (Noble Mohandass V. State) and the

relevant paragraph is extracted hereunder:

“7. As far as the offence under Section 506(2) is concerned, the

learned counsel for the revision petitioner contended that the

threat was not a real one, that it was of the kind of words which

are currently and frequently used by people when they are angry

__________

Page14 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

and that further the threat was not spoken to by P.W. 3 and P.W.

4 who by that time had already come to the scene of occurrence.

It is, in fact, found from the records that the threat would have

been lashed out after P.Ws. 3 and 4 came to the place and

separated both the husband and wife. Therefore, the evidence of

P.W. 1 should have been corroborated by the evidence of P.W. 3

and P.W. 4 who were necessary witnesses to the occurrence.

Since they did not corroborate the testimony of P.W. 1 in this

aspect, the offence cannot be held to be proved. Further for

being an offence under Section 506(2) which is rather an

important offence punishable with imprisonment which may

extend to seven years, the threat should be a real one and not

just a mere word when the person uttering it does exactly mean

what he says and also when the person at whom threat is

launched does not feel threatened actually. In fact P.W. 1 when

she filed the complaint to the police officer, did not express any

fear for her life nor asked for any protection. Therefore, the

offence under S. 506(2) is not made out.”

Therefore, it is clear that the threat should be a real one and not just a mere

words when the person uttering it does exactly mean what he says and also

when the person at whom threat is launched does not feel threatened actually.

Further, the case of the prosecution that all the appellants uttered the same

words at the same time also highly improbable. Therefore, this Court is of the

considered view that the prosecution has failed to prove the offence under

__________

Page15 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

Section 506(i) of IPC beyond all reasonable doubts and the Accused herein are

entitled to the benefit of doubts.

19. Insofar as the threatening said to have made to the victim, it is the

case of the victim that the first appellant compelled her to love and marry and

threatened her. The first appellant is aged about 21 years. It appears that

attracted to the victim, he expressed his love in a strong tone that he will go to

the extent of kidnapping her to marry her. His strong tone was misunderstood

by the victim as threatening. Therefore, the said action would not come under

the purview of Section 506(i) of IPC.

20. Further, it is the case of the prosecution that the first appellant herein

had compelled her to love and marry him. The careful reading of Section 11 of

the POCSO Act makes it clear that to establish an offence under Section 11 of

the POCSO Act, the Accused should have committed any of the acts mentioned

in Clause (i) to (vi) of Section 11 of the POCSO Act with sexual intent. The

charge is not clear as which clause the action of the Accused would fall. In the

absence of specific charge, it would be difficult for the Accused is to defend.

The possible prejudice is to be presumed. Further, in view of the admission of

the defacto complainant that he does not know who has typed the complaint,

this court is of the considered view that the first information being the

__________

Page16 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

foundation of the criminal case, if it is found to be doubtful, then the edifice

build up on the said foundation would fall to the ground. The delay in

registering the first information report and its delayed dispatch to the court also

creates further doubts in the case of the prosecution. Therefore, this court is of

the considered view that the Appellants herein are entitled to the said benefit of

doubts.

21. In the given circumstances, the present Criminal Appeal is allowed

and the appellants are acquitted from the charges. Bail bonds executed by the

appellants are ordered to be discharged. The fine amount, if any, paid is ordered

to be refunded to the appellants.

12-10-2026

Index: Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation: Yes/No

Indu

To

1.The Inspector of Police,

Palanichettypatti Police Station,

Theni District.

2.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

__________

Page17 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

S.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

Indu

Crl.A.(MD) No.124 of 2019

12-10-2026

__________

Page18 of 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis